Month: March 2007

Failed Liberal leadership candidate Gerard Kennedy have joined with some Liberal MPs to sue the National Post and one of its columnists Jonathan Kay for libel. Here’s the release from the Liberals:

Former Liberal leadership contestant Gerard Kennedy; Navdeep Bains, MP for Mississauga – Brampton South; and Omar Alghabra, MP for Mississauga – Erindale, served the National Post, columnist Jonathan Kay and related persons with notices of libel over statements that the three politicians were involved in deals to exchange votes in return for changes to national security policy.

Included as a defendant in one of the notices is John Doe, representing the anonymous source cited by Mr. Kay in his column published in the National Post February 27th, 2007.

“Mr. Kay has suggested criminal conduct on the part of Mr. Kennedy. This suggestion is false and defamatory. The situation is particularly aggravated by the fact that Mr. Kay's article is based on the information of a source whose identity, motives and credibility have been concealed. We look forward to exposing Mr. Kay's anonymous source so that Mr. Kennedy may be fully vindicated,” said Mr. Howard Winkler of Aird and Berlis, LLP, lawyer for Mr. Kennedy.

The conversations involving Mr. Bains related as fact in the column never took place, according to the notice prepared by Julian Porter, lawyer for Mr. Bains.

“In his notice of libel, Alghabra denies his political and policy decisions are driven by his ethnicity and that he knew of and condoned the vilification of Bob Rae and Arlene Perly Rae, at the Liberal leadership convention,” stated Cliff Lax, counsel for Mr. Alghabra.

“We have enormous respect for the role of the media,” says Kennedy, “but these are equally very serious and completely false statements that if left alone would mislead the public and distort public debate.”

The service of a libel notice is the first step in a defamation suit.

Now playing: Franz Schubert – Sonate En Ré Majeur, D.850 (Op.53) – Rondo Allegro Moderato

Prime Minister Harper and Opposition Leader Stephane Dion were out of Ottawa today — Harper was in Montreal to give a speech and, later today, Dion will be introducing Al Gore when Gore gives a speech in Toronto. That meant that the Liberal deputy leader Michael Ignatieff led off Question Period and the Conservative Government House Leader Peter Van Loan handled the questions that the Prime Minister would normally handle. The two picked up where Harper and Dion left off yesterday — arguing about Afghanistan and human rights.

Mr. Michael Ignatieff (Etobicoke—Lakeshore, Lib.) (left):
Mr. Speaker, yesterday in the House we once again saw that the Prime Minister will say anything and do anything to win his never-ending election campaign. It is clear that this is a Prime Minister who thinks that no attack is beneath him, no shot is too cheap and no smear is too unbecoming.

If the Prime Minister really cared about the troops, really cared about human rights, really cared about the success of the Afghan mission, he would replace his incompetent minister.

Will the Prime Minister stop putting election politics before everything else and replace the Minister of National Defence immediately?

*   *   *

Hon. Peter Van Loan (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform, CPC) (right) :
Mr. Speaker, Canadians see a pattern of behaviour from the Liberal Party. It neglected the military for 13 years. The Liberal defence critic calls the military names. He calls the Chief of Defence Staff a prop. The defence minister, a brigadier general with 32 years of distinguished service, is sneered at as the arms dealer. This is from the Liberal Party whose advertisements insulted the military by speaking of its horror at “soldiers in our streets”.

Those are the disrespectful deeds, words and ads of the Liberal Party and no, we are not making this up.

*   *   *

Mr. Michael Ignatieff (Etobicoke—Lakeshore, Lib.) :
Mr. Speaker, members on that side of the House do not seem to understand they have no monopoly on patriotism, no monopoly on support for the military, no monopoly on support for our troops in Afghanistan.

The Prime Minister is blinded by ambition and Canada is hobbled by his arrogance. By putting into question Canada's duty to uphold the Geneva Convention, the Prime Minister has jeopardized our international reputation.

When will the Prime Minister put Canada's interests ahead of his own?

*   *   *

Hon. Peter Van Loan (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform, CPC) :
Mr. Speaker, this government corrected an agreement originally entered into by the Liberal government on this very issue in order to ensure Geneva Convention protections are provided.

Yesterday the Liberal defence critic told the media, “It's a disgrace to ask us to make a choice between the Taliban detainees and our troops”. On this side we do not find it hard to make a choice between our troops and the Taliban. We stand behind our troops.

*   *   *

M. Michael Ignatieff (Etobicoke—Lakeshore, Lib.) :
Monsieur le Président, hier, et encore aujourd'hui, le gouvernement a présenté un choix ridicule à la population canadienne: « Si vous croyez que les prisonniers de guerre devaient être traités en accord avec le droit international, alors vous ne supportez pas les troupes ». C'est un choix ridicule.

Le premier croit-il que la Convention de Genève est optionnelle? Croit-il qu'on traite les prisonniers dépend de ce qu'on pense d'eux? Pourquoi tolère-t-il un ministre de la Défense incompétent et quand va-t-il le remplacer?

*   *   *

Hon. Peter Van Loan (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform, CPC) :
Mr. Speaker, the irony drips. This is from the member for Etobicoke—Lakeshore who said that torture is justified when dealing with terrorists.

What we have been seeing is a pattern of behaviour from the Liberal Party. It does not respect the men and women in the military, suggesting they are a threat when they are allowed on the streets in Canada.

The Liberals spent the past month saying that police officers are not fit to participate in panels that review traditional appointments, something that the Liberal government entrusted to Liberal candidates and Liberal Party executives.

Why does the Liberal Party have a problem with the Canadians who put their lives on the line to protect us?

Joe Comuzzi, who has been representing the city of Thunder Bay, Ontario as a Liberal since 1988, was expelled from his caucus after he said he would vote in favour of the Conservative budget tabled Monday. His leader,  Stephane Dion, says budget votes, like Throne Speech votes, are confidence votes and, as a result, the caucus must vote as a group.

This morning, Comuzzi released this statement:

I just want to be sure that the people are clear on my position on the budget. I have had the opportunity to represent my constituents for the past 18 years and over that time we have arrived at a point where our region is in a state of serious transition. This budget contains funds and addresses some of the critical issues we face today. For example the Molecular Medicine Research initiative is essential to this transition. The municipal government, the provincial government and private sector partners are all at the table with committed money, yet the Liberal Party expects me to be critical of a budget that can complete the funding formulae that would launch a facility that has huge economic and employment implications.

I have no desire to go against the Liberal Party however this is the right thing for the people of my riding. They are who have entrusted me to represent them for the last 18 years.

Furthermore, if you study the budget and it's implications there are opportunities for the forest industry to look at themselves in new ways. Research and development and knowledge – based opportunities in the forestry sector are clearly eligible to be part of it. The 195 million dollars contained in the budget over the next two years is designated to put knowledge to work for the social and economic benefit of Canadians. Why aren't we developing new and innovative manufactured forest products, new equipment design and silviculture procedures or linking pharmaceutical research to the Boreal Forest? The representatives of the labour and the forest industries need to redefine their industry, the old way of doing things has clearly changed. I love Canada and my region and if doing the right thing has consequences, I must accept them. However I will never, never put my gain in front of representing my constituents.